dnatrack is a work in progress — updates ship daily. Report a bug or request a feature →

The Extraction and Recovery Efficiency of Pure DNA for Different Types of Swabs

Journal of Forensic Sciences, 2018

Study Design

Addressed Question

determination of sampling efficiency of a number of different swab types

Activity Context

None

Category

Recovery

Specifications

Sampling

Variables of Interest

Swap Type

Stringency of Control

Controlled

Number of Individuals

1

Replicates per Individual and Condition

3

Nucleic Acid

DNA

Bodily Origin

extracted DNA from saliva

Depositor & Contact

Depositor Characteristics

N/A

Criteria for Shedder Status

N/A

Previous Activities

N/A

Contact Scenario

deposition of isolated DNA on glass slide - drying - sampling

Primary Substrate

Primary Substrate Type

glass slide

Primary Substrate Material

Glass

Deposit

20 µl isolated DNA with known concentration

Delay

drying for approx. 30 min

Secondary Substrate

Secondary Substrate Type

N/A

Secondary Substrate Material

N/A

Secondary Substrate Contact

N/A

Further Transfer

N/A

Sampling

Background DNA on Sampled Surface

Negative (Confirmed)

Sampling Time

direct

Persistence

N/A

Sampling Method

sampling with 8 swab types: cotton: Invasive Sterile EUROTUBO collection swab; Nylon flocked: eSwab, 4N6FLOQ swab buccal, 4N6FLOQ swab crime scene; rayon: Transwab, Dryswab; Foam (polyurethane): Medium Clean Foam swab; Polyester: alpha swab with long handle (all moistened with 50 µl TE buffer)

Sampling Area

glass slide

Laboratory Analysis

Extraction

placing swab head in 250 µl TE buffer and vortexing for 1 minute

DNA Quantification

AccuGreen High Sensitivity dsDNA kit

Input for Profiling

N/A

Profiling

N/A

Reference Samples

N/A

Profile Interpretation and Mixture Analysis

N/A

RNA Data Interpretation

N/A

Results

DNA Quantity

0.0-1.5 ng/µl

Profile Quality

N/A

Parameter Used for Comparison

recovery efficiency = (extraction volume * DNA conc. In sample) / (applied volume * original DNA conc.) * 100%

Summary of Results

recovery efficiencies varied greatly between 1.5% and 46.6 % with Nylon flocked swabs showing both the highest (buccal swabs) and lowest (crime scene swabs) recovery efficiencies;

Raised Questions

comparison to other sampling methods (e.g. dissolvable Diomics Swabs, adhesive tapes)

Cautionary Remarks

false positive quantification values observed with several swab types, but impact on calculated efficiencies not discussed;